This paper proposes a tool for the classification of domain-specific intraterm relations. It thus aims to present both the process and the product of classifying these relations. First, a description is given of how semantic relations and — more specifically — intraterm relations are understood and represented. Then, a structured set of relational schemas is presented, based mainly on insights from cognitive semantics and functional linguistics. Finally, the general model is applied to the semantic classification of complex terms. This step is specific in several ways: in the type of relation (internal semantic relations of complex terms), in the subject field (ceramic tile manufacturing) and in the languages analysed (German and Spanish). The advantage of this procedure is that, if applied to different subject fields, the resulting classifications can reach a high degree of specificity, but they are nonetheless comparable due to the fact that they will be based on a common theoretical background and methodology of classification.

In terminology, the predominance of nouns is an incontestable phenomenon. In Korean terminologies, this predominance of nouns is even more notable because the meaning and function associated with adjectives in Indo-European languages are often realized in noun form. However, the rarer adjectival terms are, the more they are used in restrictive, repetitive ways in specialized domains. Thus, it is important to distinguish the different senses of these terms. In this work, focusing on semantic characterization in terminology, we distinguish the different senses of adjectival medical terms by applying lexico-semantic criteria (L’Homme 2004a) and by classifying the arguments of the adjective into semantic categories (Bae et al. 2002). With this work, we aim to enrich terminological descriptions found in Korean medical dictionnaries by demonstrating empirically a method for distinguishing the different senses of adjectival medical terms. To achieve our goal, we used the KAIST corpus, composed of medical texts (1,500,000 eojeols), and a group of texts on various subjects (40,000,000 eojeols).

This article offers a review of the causes of denominative variation in terminology observed by different authors, based on a classification of the areas that motivate variation and illustrated by examples of the most relevant types of variation in the present context. This analysis offers a typology of the causes and sub-causes of denominative variation in terminology. It is presented in five main sections: dialectal causes, related to different origins of authors; functional causes, related to different communicative registers; discursive causes, related to different stylistic and expressive needs of authors; interlinguistic causes, related to contact between languages; and cognitive causes, related to different conceptualisations and motivations.

The prescriptive school of thought in terminology holds that terms should be fixed items and should not be prone to variation. More recently, however, descriptive studies have begun to reveal that many terms do in fact have variants. This poses a challenge for language professionals such as translators and terminologists, who need to decide which form of a term to use in a given context. This article explores one specific type of variant that occurs frequently in medical language — variants that can be formed by combining elements of a term in a different order (e.g. cardiovascular vs. vasculo­cardiac). By studying such variants in corpora, we have identified some regular patterns that appear to reveal conceptual, linguistic and social motivations behind term choice. An understanding of these factors may help translators and terminologists to choose the most appropriate term.

This paper describes the formal properties of a system that understands organic chemical terminology. The system recognises terms in texts, analyses these terms, reconstructs their molecular structure (to the extent it is made explicit in the term), and classifies these terms according to functional and structural properties. The system is able to deal with fully specified chemical terms, underspecified terms such as deoxypentose, class names and terms that are built up by subterms from any of these. Not only the depth of analysis but also its ability to cope with underspecification and class names distinguishes it from other existing systems.

The principal aim of this review was to undertake a study of terminological resources relating to winemaking and to discover the origin, development and state of the art of wine terminology. The present study covers all relevant aspects of wine terminology and terminography, and it also digs into history to reconstruct the development and growth of a most fascinating and valuable branch of terminology. Illuminating the context in which wine terminology started its development as a separate branch of general terminology, this study shows different periods and stages of the development of winemaking terminology, reveals the far-reaching linguistic and cultural interpenetration of its word-stock and highlights the dynamics of wine terminology research and analysis in different countries of the world. It develops a classification of winemaking terminological resources, studies links between wine terminology and other industries (e.g. culinary terminology) and explains contribution made by Henri Faes and Eero Alanne to the development of winemaking terminology, as well as contributions by a number of industry professionals.